~ archived since 2018 ~

Circumcision: I was ignorant of my faith

[deleted]

May 6, 2012

11 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://rubyslippersx3.blogspot.com/2012/05/i-was-ignorant-of-my-faith.html

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Circumcision: I was ignorant of my faith
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	11
Comments	15
Date	May 6, 2012 7:43 AM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/t9gyz/circumcision_i_was_ignorant_of_my_faith/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/circumcision-i-was-ignorant-of-my-faith.1022413 https://theredarchive.com/post/1022413

Comments

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Irrel_M 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OperatorMike -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

As a strong supporter of Mens Rights. I do not have a problem with circumcisions.

Nobody here is against voluntary consensual adult circumcision. We are against forced circumcision of un-consenting persons, specially newborns. We believe in the right to genital integrity and body autonomy.

TO me it is a medical thing

Yeah, if you were living in Africa.

Royal Australasian College of Physicians

After reviewing the currently available evidence, the RACP believes that the frequency of diseases modifiable by circumcision, the level of protection offered by circumcision and the complication rates of circumcision do not warrant routine infant circumcision in Australia and New Zealand. (Page 5)

[download link to PDF file] http://www.racp.edu.au/index.cfm?objectid=65118B16-F145-8B74-236C86100E4E3E8E

British Medical Association

The medical evidence about its health impact is equivocal.

[..]

Nevertheless, normal anatomical and physiological characteristics of the infant foreskin have in the past been misinterpreted as being abnormal. The British Association of Paediatric Surgeons advises that there is rarely a clinical indication for circumcision.

[..]

The medical benefits previously claimed, however, have not been convincingly proven, and it is now widely accepted, including by the BMA, that this surgical procedure has medical and psychological risks. It is essential that doctors perform male circumcision only where this is demonstrably in the best interests of the child.

[..]

Best interests

-Doctors must act in the best interests of the patient.

-Even where they do not decide for themselves, the views that children express are important in determining what is in their best interests.

-The BMA does not believe that parental preference alone constitutes sufficient grounds for performing a surgical procedure on a child unable to express his own view. Parental preference must be weighed in terms of the child’s interests.

-The courts have confirmed that the child’s lifestyle and likely upbringing are relevant factors to take into account. The particular situation of the case needs to be considered.

-Parents must explain and justify requests for circumcision, in terms of the child’s interests.

http://www.bma.org.uk/ethics/consent_and_capacity/malecircumcision2006.jsp

Canadian Pediatric Society

Recommendation: Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely performed.

Validation: This recommendation is in keeping with previous statements on neonatal circumcision by the Canadian Paediatric Society and the American Academy of Pediatrics. The statement was reviewed by the Infectious Disease Committee of the Canadian Paediatric Society. The Board of Directors of the Canadian Paediatric Society has reviewed its content and approved it for publication.

http://www.cps.ca/english/statements/FN/fn96-01.htm

Koninklijke Nederlandsche Maatschappij tot bevordering der Geneeskunst (Royal Dutch Medical Society) or KNMG

This viewpoint by the KNMG is jointly endorsed by the following scientific associations:

The Netherlands Society of General Practitioners
The Netherlands Society of Youth Healthcare Physicians
The Netherlands Association of Paediatric Surgeons
The Netherlands Association of Plastic Surgeons
The Netherlands Association for Paediatric Medicine
The Netherlands Urology Association
The Netherlands Surgeons’ Association

There is no convincing evidence that circumcision is useful or necessary in terms of prevention or hygiene. Partly in the light of the complications which can arise during or after circumcision, circumcision is not justifiable except on medical/therapeutic grounds. Insofar as there are medical benefits, such as a possibly reduced risk of HIV infection, it is reasonable to put off circumcision until the age at which such a risk is relevant and the boy himself can decide about the intervention, or can opt for any available alternatives.

[..]

Non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors conflicts with the child’s right to autonomy and physical integrity.

[..]

Non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors is contrary to the rule that minors may only be exposed to medical treatments if illness or abnormalities are present, or if it can be convincingly demonstrated that the medical intervention is in the interest of the child, as in the case of vaccinations.

[..]

The fact that this is a medically non-essential intervention with a real risk of complications makes the quality of this advice particularly important.

[download link to PDF file] http://knmg.artsennet.nl/web/file?uuid=579e836d-ea83-410f-9889-feb7eda87cd5&owner=a8a9ce0e-f42b-47a5-960e-be08025b7b04&contentid=77976&elementid=771754

Also reported by BBC News

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15486834

National Coalition for Men, America

"Throughout the world, medical associations have found no medical justification for male circumcision. The British, Canadian, South African, Australian, Dutch, and New Zealand medical associations all found the purported medical benefits to be unfounded, and that the risks and complications outweigh any benefits. The Dutch and South African medical associations even declared infant male circumcision to be harmful, unethical, and a violation of a child's right to bodily integrity....... Religious, cultural, and parental rights end when it comes to someone else's bodily integrity. It's his body, and his choice."

The circumcision as AIDS prevention tool myth has been debunked outside of USA --->

"Our conclusion is that such proposals ignore doubts about the robustness of the evidence from the African random-controlled trials as to the protective effect of circumcision and the practical value of circumcision as a means of HIV control; misrepresent the nature of Australia's HIV epidemic and exaggerate the relevance of the African random-controlled trials findings to it; underestimate the risks and harm of circumcision; and ignore questions of medical ethics and human rights. The notion of circumcision as a ‘surgical vaccine’ is criticised as polemical and unscientific..... Circumcision of infants or other minors has no place among HIV control measures in the Australian and New Zealand context; proposals such as these should be rejected." - Public Health Association of Australia

"That the relationship between circumcision and transmission of HIV is at the very least unclear is illustrated by the fact that the US combines a high prevalence of STDs and HIV infections with a high percentage of routine circumcisions. The Dutch situation is precisely the reverse: a low prevalence of HIV/AIDS combined with a relatively low number of circumcisions. As such, behavioural factors appear to play a far more important role than whether or not one has a foreskin." - Royal Dutch Medical Association

Source: both quotes published in Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health

The Journal of Law and Medicine also trashed those studies - claiming selection bias, inadequate blinding, problematic randomization, experimenter bias, lead time bias, supportive bias, participant expectation bias, time-out discrepancy, and lack of investigating of non-sexual HIV transmission among other confounding factors and problems.

EDIT - read this comment: http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/t942n/so_saw_this_at_the_capitol_building_nice_to_see/c4ky3s8

[–]hyloda 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]OperatorMike -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]hyloda 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OperatorMike -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

and I don't understand what people have against it.

This question has been asked thousands of times. We are not here to educate you. It's your job to find out why we are against cosmetic non-therapeutically infant circumcision.

Subscribe to /r/intactivists
Male circumcision was banned in public hospitals by various Australian state governments.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/cosmetic-circumcision-banned/story-e6frea83-1111114853996

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/victoria-to-scrap-public-hospital-circumcision/2007/08/12/1186857323447.html

Why the move was supported by Australian Medical Association

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2007-12-09/doctors-back-call-for-circumcision-ban/981976

Here are good resources to start:

Circumcision Resource:

Videos:

Information About the Cons of Circumcision:

For Jewish Readers:

Jewish Alternative to Circumcision:

Brit Shalom

If it is a Female circumcision vs a male one. I feel the yare on two totally different levels.

The people who practice Female Circumcision do it for the same reason YOU practice male circumcision. They believe Female Circumcision has medical benefits ---> http://islamqa.info/en/ref/45528

[–]OperatorMike -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]OperatorMike -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

If you only to see the world from your own point of view and not consider others; such as the men mentioned in the article below, then you aren't a "supporter of men's rights."

Canadian Medical Association Journal - Whole again: the practice of foreskin restoration

Today, some men do it for sexual reasons, though the nerves lost during circumcision cannot be regenerated. Others do it to achieve emotional wholeness, believing they are victims of genital mutilation. “Many patients really become fixated on this problem,” Schultheiss writes in an email. Health professionals are getting better at validating and treating the emotional problems sometimes experienced by circumcised men, Schultheiss noted in his paper.
Others do it for emotional reasons, wanting to get back what they believe was wrongly taken from them as infants. “A good portion of them are extremely angry at doctors and hospitals and their parents,” Griffiths says.